Taos Institute
Education as
Relating
November 5, 2021
Chester C. Warzynski
404-242-0172
1
Research-Based Leadership for Education and Social Change
2
Presentation Objectives
3
The Landscape of HE is Changing
Our changing environment requires universities to re-think their approach to social change:
Research on Failed Change Projects
4
60-70% of new organizational change projects fail (Kotter, 1996; Beer & Nohria, 2000; and Barrett, Grant & Wailes; 2006):
5
Conflicting Subcultures in Higher Ed
Administrative Subculture
Academic Subculture
Types of Innovation
6
Social Innovation
7
Social innovation is a new configuration of practices designed to facilitate social change and improve the human condition.
It is based on developing and institutionalizing new theories, processes and practices that build organizational capacity and empower actors to address social challenges.
It involves mobilizing and building networks to achieve societal goals through a decentralized approach involving a combination of bottoms-up and top-down processes and practices.
Grand Social Challenges
Howaldt et al. 2014, pp.151.
8
Drivers of Social Change
Howaldt et al. 2014, pp.151.
9
Georgia Institute of Technology 1885-2021
10
Tech Tower & Shop Building
Clough Undergraduate Learning Commons
Learning to Social Change via
Research & Education
11
Georgia Tech Case Study
A technology-based research university comprised of six Colleges: Business., Science, Engineering, Design, Computing & Liberal Arts. Ranked 3rd among U.S. public universities and 35th world-wide by U.S. News and World Report). Campuses in Atlanta, Georgia USA, Metz, France and Shenzhen, China.
1999 2009 2019
12
Strategic Planning Process
Organize Planning Groups
(Steering Committee, etc.)
Identify key participants and�develop plan and agenda�for their involvement
Conduct an Assessment of�the Environment
Collect and analyze data and �information to diagnose your�environment and organization
Identify Strategic �Opportunities & Capabilities
Identify the strategic themes�and requirements
Develop a Local Theory
of Change
Reach consensus on mission, �values and vision of the ideal�future state
Enact & Diffuse the Local Theory
Develop short and long�term goals and �strategies
Embed in the Culture
Call for proposals and projects
Needed to implement plan
1
2
3
4
5
6
GIT Strategic Planning Organization�(Roles and Responsibilities)
13
Executive Leadership
Team
(4)
Strategic Planning Team
(3)
Planning Team Staff (12)
Core
Contributors
(95)
Steering Committee
(71)
Advisors
Meeting Schedules
(each working to time phased tasks)
Eight Subcommittees
(96)
14
Strategic Planning Subcommittees
Subcommittee Roles & Responsibilities
Research Guidelines for Subcommittees
1. Planning
2. Data collection
3. Data analysis
4. Feedback
5. 4th Generation Evaluation
Ground Rules for Subcommittees
Time-table for Constructing Position Papers
19
Warm-Up Exercise: Assumptions vs Facts - Implications for Leaders
Engaging Stakeholder Groups
21
Strategic Planning Engages Stakeholders
Strategic planning is a relational and network building process in which “new” ideas and concepts, together with resources, technologies, and facilities are reified and embedded in the organization.
Engage Stakeholders in Social Inquiry/Research
Analyze, & Interpret Data
Create Local Change Theories/ Practices
Enact & Diffuse Theories/Practices
Embed Theory/Practices in Structure & Culture
Stakeholder Workshops
RBL Strategic Planning Questions
23
What are/should be the major contributions of the Organization? (consider all your stakeholders)
What are/should be our core values in pursuing these contributions?
What are the organization’s greatest strengths or assets in making these contributions?
What are the best possible opportunities for improvement and innovation in the organization?
Based on our strengths and opportunities, what should the university aspire to do or become in the next 25 years?
What strategies, initiatives, programs, projects, or results could help us to design and construct our future?
The Blind Spot in Leadership
The blind spot for most leaders (and their stakeholders) is “in not seeing or understanding the full process of “social reality formation” (p.6) in terms of how experience is cognized, accessed and translated into knowledge and action at the tacit, behavioral, relational (group/organization) and system levels.
24
McKinsey Leadership Research Project (2000), “Leadership in the Context of Emerging Worlds: Illuminating the Blind Spot”
Research-Based Leadership (RBL)
RBL involves engaging and empowering a broad range of stakeholders in research and learning to co-construct local theories of change and develop new practices, create dynamic capabilities, and build infrastructure to foster innovation and social change.
25
Translation, Learning and Change
“Translation is a process in which a leader aligns the interests of many in a chain (network). To accomplish this, leaders marshal all the evidence and all their allies (and their experience) at one spot in regular consultation meetings with the representatives and negotiate and resolve differences with others to form communities. Leaders create communities of practice comprised of many networks which then shape and construct social reality” (Fox, 2000).
26
�Research-Based Leadership Process �with Converging Methods
27
Research Methods and Outcomes
Plan & Realign Culture & Structure
28
Engagement
(Research Methods)
Appreciative Inquiry
Semiotic Method
Scientific Method
Actor- Network Method
Outcomes
(Build Capacity)
Identify Strengths
Create Meaning
Develop Evidence
Enrich & Leverage Roles
Method 1: Appreciative Inquiry �
29
Engaging key stakeholders to create a baseline of strengths and assets
Method 2: Semiotics – Constructing Meaning*
30
Socio-Cultural Situation - Context
Implicit in language (meaning as use) are Values/Goals/Strategies/Actions/Roles/Desired Effects
Semiosis = process of making meaning as mediated by signs and the interpretation of those signs. It is a “cognition produced in the mind” via language to describe, explain, and predict value-laden and physical effects, e.g., “time is money”.
*Adapted from Peirce, C. S. (1955). Collected papers, Princeton University Press; Also see Weick, K. E. *1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Objects
Effect
Signifiers
31
Outliers: Circumstance, Competency, Culture
Chris Langan
IQ 195/210 - Bouncer
Robert Oppenheimer
Genius - Lead scientist
Manhattan Project
Outliers are those who have been given opportunities and those who have had the strength and presence of mind to seize them.
-- No one makes it alone.--
There’s no such thing as an overnight success.
Developing a Local Theory of Change
33
Peirce’s Triadic Meaning-Making Exercise
Method 3: Scientific Method for Validation
36
Learn & Adjust
Research Design
Identify Hypotheses/Models
Develop Local Theories
Make Predictions
Test Theories
Evaluate Findings
Revise Theories
Enact & Communicate Theories
Application of Scientific Method
35
Mixed Methods: Interviews, focus groups, surveys
Engagement of leadership and stakeholders
Communication of Results and Revision of Change Theories
Method 4: Actor-Network Method
The Actor-Network Theory method involves the constitution of heterogeneous networks in which both human and non-human entities assume identities and engage in interaction to:
Developing Actor – Networks
37
Before
After
Anklam, P. 2007. A practical guide to creating and sustaining networks at work and in the world. Burlington, MA: Elsevier.
1. Map networks
2. Analyze networks
3. Increase connections
�Establishing and Enlarging Networks �
38
Mission Statement
The Georgia Tech community – students, staff, faculty, and alumni – will realize our motto of “Progress and Service” through effectiveness and innovation in teaching and learning, our research advances, and entrepreneurship in all sectors of society. We will be leaders in improving the human condition in Georgia, the United States, and around the globe.
40
GT Vision
Georgia Tech will define the technological university of the 21st century. As a result, we will be leaders in influencing major technological, social, and policy decisions that address critical global challenges. “What does Georgia Tech think?” will be a common question in research, business, the media, and government.
Values and Operating Principles
42
Designing the Future
Georgia Tech Strategic Vision and Plan
Goal 1: Highly Respected Technology-Focused Learning Institution |
|
Goal 2: Excellence in Scholarship and Research |
|
Goal 3: Leadership, Innovation & Public Service in Graduates |
|
Goal 4: Expand our Global Footprint to Global Citizens |
|
Goal 5: Institutional Effectiveness |
|
43
GT Strategic Plan: Experiential Theory of Change
44
GT Experiential Theory of Change, Cont. . .
45
Executive Leadership Team
Steering Committee
Support Team: project facilitators
Project co-leaders
executive sponsor
project co-leaders
executive sponsor
project co-leaders
executive sponsor
project co-leaders
executive sponsor
Project Team
Project Team
Project Team
Project Team
Enacting the Strategic Plan
46
Top Ten Initiatives
Group Exercise
47
Question: How can your university foster greater innovation to improve the human condition?
Example: Increase cross-disciplinary collaboration through empowering actor-networks to develop local theories of change and new practices for addressing society’s grand challenges (effect).
If we do this ___________it will produce this ____________. (proposed action) (desired effect)
Fourth Generation Evaluation (FGE)
48
Current State Assessment (Cont’d)
49
| To what extent do we… | Low (1+2) | Neutral�(3) | High�(4+5) |
1 | … identify stakeholders and project champions? | 27.1% | 40.8% | 32.1% |
2 | … assess impact of projects on stakeholders? | 26.6% | 42.2% | 31.2% |
3 | … identify characteristics, expertise, etc., needed? | 23.7% | 47.9% | 28.4% |
4 | … provide necessary training? | 29.4% | 43.5% | 27.1% |
5 | … engage support from right partners? | 31.5% | 43.7% | 24.9% |
6 | … establish forums for collaboration/coordination? | 34.7% | 41.3% | 23.9% |
7 | … engage academic and research experts? | 39.0% | 37.1% | 23.9% |
8 | … assess alignment with GT's Strategic Plan? | 23.3% | 41.9% | 34.9% |
9 | … assess impact on business and operatons of Inst.? | 27.9% | 37.8% | 33.6% |
10 | … design and test metrics to measure success? | 42.3% | 37.6% | 20.2% |
11 | … assess if existing infrastructure can be leveraged? | 31.3% | 41.1% | 27.6% |
12 | … quantify cost savings or efficiencies? | 34.4% | 37.3% | 28.2% |
Scale:
1 = To a Very Small Extent
2 = To a Small Extent
3 = To a Moderate Extent
4 = To a Large Extent
5 = To a Very Large Extent
49
Assessment of Cultural Practices
Cultural Practices Assessment (Cont’d)
50
| To what extent do we… | Low (1+2) | Neutral�(3) | High�(4+5) |
13 | … define and communicate a clear strategy? | 36.7% | 37.2% | 26.0% |
14 | … target and assess efficacy of our communications? | 39.0% | 39.5% | 21.5% |
15 | … conduct lessons learned reviews and implment lessons? | 46.0% | 37.4% | 16.6% |
16 | … conduct periodic status checks of progress? | 25.4% | 40.7% | 34.0% |
17 | … receive clear direction and parameters from project leaders? | 30.7% | 46.7% | 22.6% |
18 | … involve stakeholders in analysis and decision options? | 32.7% | 39.8% | 27.5% |
19 | … make decisions at appropriate levels? | 40.1% | 38.7% | 21.2% |
20 | … have visible engagement and accountability from decision-makers? | 38.2% | 42.0% | 19.8% |
| | | | |
| Average | 33.0% | 40.7% | 26.3% |
Recommendations of Stakeholders
51
The Culture Model Evolved
52
Strategic Plan and Culture Change Outcomes
53
Creating the Next in Education: GT’s “Deliberate Innovation, Lifetime Education”*
Granovetter effect (1973) – the idea that weak ties, which are shared by individuals and team members in a network of people with diverse backgrounds, creates a more powerful stimulus for innovation than strong ties because they bring new information and different perspectives.
*Commission on Creating the Next in Education (2018). Deliberate innovation, lifetime education, Georgia Institute of Technology.
Potential Pitfalls of RBL
55
Rapidly changing business needs
Sponsorship is lost
External Consultants are hired
Stakeholders are lacking in trust or don’t want to participate
Unrealistic deadlines
Engagement exercises are ill-defined
Lack of communication and follow up.
Frequent starts and stops during the process
Leaders and participants lack competencies and appropriate skills
Previous research, evidence and best practices are ignored
Typology of Social Innovation
56
Howaldt et al. 2014
57
Howaldt, J., Butzin, A., Domanski, D. and Kaletka, C. (2014). Theoretical Approaches to Social Innovation: A Critical Literature Review. Dortmund: http://www.si-drive.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ D1_1-Critical-Literature-Review_final.pdf.
Future Research Directions
and monitor new developments
Final Musing . . .
A divine spark lives in every thing and being, but each spark is enclosed by an isolating shell. Only we can liberate it . . . by holding holy converse with the thing, and using it in a holy manner . . . The task of every person . . . is to affirm . . . the world and himself and by this very means to transform both.
Martin Buber, The Way of Man
64
Selected References
59